Since 1842, students and faculty have been working together to maintain a community of trust at the University in which it is assumed that students will not lie, cheat or steal. Recently, some faculty have questioned the nature of the honor system -- is it an effective deterrent or an unattainable ideal bound by tradition?
Physics Prof. Lou Bloomfield, who sparked increased scrutiny of the system after initiating 158 cases against students in his popular "How Things Work" class in 2001, cited the single sanction provision of the honor system as a major concern.
"I personally think it's a poor choice," Bloomfield said. "I think that it comes out of some antebellum notion of honor that one is tainted or untainted, and this is a community for only the untainted. I recognize how deeply woven it is into the fabric of the University and how hard it is to get away from it."
James Sofka, assistant dean in the College and assistant professor in the Department of Politics, has been a member of the Honor Committee's Faculty Advisory Board for two years. He said although the single sanction has its faults, he supports it because it is what the system of student self-governance has mandated.
"Personally, I'm mixed on the single sanction," Sofka said. "I view the single sanction the way Churchill viewed democracy: It's imperfect, but it's the best that we've got. It's mixed in that on the good side it's consistent and fair. On the other hand, it does raise the bar for a lot of faculty members to say, 'Do I initiate a case and possibly risk somebody being expelled?'"
Astronomy Prof. Charles R. Tolbert, who brought charges against former University student Adam Boyd in a highly publicized open honor trial in 2002, said the single sanction is too harsh of a penalty.
"I think the honor system needs to find some mechanisms so that a student who makes a mistake can recover," said Tolbert, also a member of the FAB. "I really wish the penalty would be softened in some way."
Outgoing Honor Committee Chair Carey Mignerey said the primary purpose of the honor system is to create a trusting atmosphere, and students who violate this pact must leave the University community. He emphasized that there is a rehabilitative mechanism for those who have been expelled.
"The faculty complaints, I think, with the single sanction, are primarily rooted in the perception that it doesn't rehabilitate students," Mignerey said. "To that end, we make attempts to rehabilitate students with transfer assistance. But I also can't underscore enough the fact that the philosophy of the community of trust is one aimed at preserving an ideal community of trust."
Politics Prof. Larry J. Sabato said the faculty ultimately should support the decisions of the Committee, respecting its role in student self-governance.
"It's a student-run system, so it's up to the students to determine what they do with it," Sabato said. "I don't believe the faculty or the administrators should be trying to influence students on a student-run system."
Another concern among faculty members is the low number of student initiations. Some faculty members said they unduly are left with the responsibility of maintaining the community of trust because students are unwilling to bring forth honor charges.
Electrical and Computer Engineering Prof. Ronald Williams, an FAB member for five years, said few student initiations indicate a shortcoming of the system.
"When you look at a student-run system where the vast majority of charges are brought by faculty, there's something wrong there," Williams said.
Bloomfield said the nature of the system disinclines students from initiating honor charges.
"The students -- for whatever reason -- cannot enforce it," Bloomfield said. "They can't initiate cases. Everything is against them in initiating cases: Modern culture is against them, the tremendous burden of being indirectly responsible for throwing a student out of school. No one wants to be a rat."
Some faculty members have concerns with the trial process. Tolbert said the trial can be adversarial in nature.
"The system has been quite confrontational," Tolbert said. "If we do bring a case, we could be accused of all kinds of things."
Bloomfield said initiating a case can be a burden for faculty members.
"It's often a pain in the neck," he said. "If you submit a case to the honor system, you can pretty much guarantee that you're going to have this anchor around your neck for the next six months. Why do I deserve all this grief when I'm just trying to do what's right?"
Tolbert said despite faculty grievances with the honor system, students and faculty alike have an obligation to enforce the community of trust.
"It is our duty to support the honor system," Tolbert said. "And it is its duty to support us."
Read More
Letter from 12 deans to Board of Visitors goes unanswered for almost two weeks
By Naima Sawaya | 8 minutes agoAt the time of publication, the academic deans had received no response from the Board regarding their offer to meet with the Board “as soon as possible.”
Sen. Tim Kaine speaks to U.Va. students, discusses Ryan resignation and more
By Grace Traxler | YesterdayIn an informal Q&A session, audience members asked about threats to federal research, the future of diversity, equity and inclusion at the University, potential shifts in the Democratic Party and more.
Summer Language Institute sees record high enrollment in its 45th year
By Zach Minkin | YesterdayFor the first time in its 45-year history, SLI is featuring both four week and eight week options, where it previously only offered an eight week program.
